Forum menu
There are some ridiculous answers on this thread - surely people can differentiate between films they didn't enjoy, and worst films of all time! Is it mild trolling? Or ignorance?
I don't want to single people out, but there have been some seriously popular and/or critically acclaimed films mentioned.
I mean, there are films where I've walked out of the cinema (Sunshine on Leith and A Star is Born spring to mind) but there's no way I'd ever categorise them as worst of all time, just not for me.
Perhaps I'm taking it too seriously
Mandy.
The Human Centipede, Hostel or any other “body horror” or torture film.
Why would anyone think that was entertaining?
Why are people listing AAA movies? Even the shit ones have great effects, acting
Yeah, thread has become a pointless read of films people don't like or are expecting to be documentaries about war, when they are merely entertainment. Some people clearly have only seen about 6 films in their lives.
After the Goddard film above I have nominate the stunningly crap ‘Performancek with Jagger and James Fox.
Chas is an East London thug who works for gangster Harry Flowers and his associates (although they don't use the word gangster to describe themselves). Chas is generally sadistic in his nature and thus revels in his work. But his sadistic nature also pervades his personal life. As such, he will work on his own personal agenda outside of the work for Harry. It is in this vein that an encounter with Joey Maddocks, a man with whom Chas has a history, leads to Chas needing to hide out from Harry and his associates. Ultimately Chas feels he needs to clandestinely leave the country. In the meantime, he, based solely on a private conversation he overhears between strangers, manages to take refuge in the basement of a Notting Hill flat owned by a man named Turner, who lives there with two female companions named Pherber and Lucy. Chas considers their lifestyle bohemian and one of free love, which is outside of his mentality. Turner is an ex-rock musician who has lost his "demon" and thus his desire to be a performer. As Chas makes arrangements for his departure out of England, he gets caught up in Turner's lifestyle, Turner who is working on his own agenda in spending time with Chas.
white101
Full MemberThe Mist
WHaaat?! It's great, in a B-movie, ratcheting up the tension plus rubbery monsters type way. And the final scene is just epic
He’d probably see that as a welcome boost to his circumstances right now.
I knew that. #ireallyneedtokeepupwithcelebrityobituaries
Otherwise, exactly what perchypanther said.
The Mist was OK but the last scene really ratcheted it up.
Although obviously not the “worst film ever” it is IMO, the worst film that has had so much critical acclaim thrust upon it. It presents itself as a historical drama, however, the story at it’s core, is complete and utter nonsense. It just does not accurately reflect WW1 military practice at all.
I found the same failings in it but it was beautifully shot and had some moments of real tension.
The worst film of all time is "The Whales of August". Its about two elderly sisters who live together overlooking the sea. One is blind and not very pleasant, the sighted nicer sister wants a window putting in their house so she can look at the whales, the blind sister does not....
I reckon if you’ve actually watched the whole film, you can’t say its the worst of anything.
The only film I can remember walking out of is Darkest Hour but I'm not going to claim it's the worst ever, I just didn't like it. Normally I'm a fan of that sort of dialogue based film but it seemed like they'd forgotten to write the dialogue.
The absolute worst movie I can remember is The Ridiculous 6. There was very little to redeem it. I've not seen Mrs Brown's Boys at all. So that maybe worse.
A.I.
Truly awful.
The problem here is, I'm not sure that the worst film ever actually is the worst film ever.
Consider 'Birdemic' or 'The Room' (probably the two worst movies I've seen). Both were diabolical, BUT, I was entertained by the awfulness of everything about them. In fact, they taught me a lot about what makes a good movie good - things you just don't notice when you watch something even half decent.
I propose that the movie rating scale is actually a sort of inverse bell curve - with 'goodness' on the x axis and 'entertainment' on the y. Something really good or really bad will be worth a watch, while the worst viewing experience will actually lie in the middle - sunk to the bottom of the curve and festering in a pool of mediocrity.
Sitting all the way through Highlander 2 was like one of those Japanese "endurance" game shows that Clive James used to feature, but there was no prize at the end. I've never seen so many people leave a cinema during a film.
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword directed by Guy Ritchie is by a distance the worst film that I have seen at the cinema. Dreadful mockney accents but the thing that really got my goat was that somehow Arthur has become a Saxon hero who ended the film shouting "This is Engalaaaand!" like some drunken football yob.
Anyone with a passing knowledge of British history will be aware that Arthur was a Celtic hero who purportedly fought successfully against the Saxons and other invaders during the Dark Ages.
The film was meant to be the first of a series of six movies - mercifully the sequels were cancelled.
The fact that this dross made it to the screen is staggering when there is a fantastic Authurian trilogy written by Bernard Cornwell which could have been a great basis for a series of films.
Thank god someone's mentioned Showgirls, what a steaming pile of crap that was. It's up there with the first of the Star Wars prequels (the Jar Jar Binks one) - lots of hype, big budget, and terrible.
Plunkett & McLean
Black Sheep - truly awful
Birds of Prey - could be awful or I could be missing something given I'm not a fan of the current DC films
I take your Plunkett and MacLeane, and raise you Sex Lives of the Potato Men.
I think we should apply a weighting system though - Big budget/massively hyped and better casted movies are allowed to be technically better than straight to DVD stuff, while actually being rated worse.
Anyone for Sex in the City II? No? I thought not.
How about Superman IV: The Quest for Peace...
Any of the Hobbit films. As a massive LOTR fan, I've never managed to sit through a whole one.
John Wick 3 - it’s pointless
Mamma Mia - it’s just awful
All off the Transformers Movies.
And most of the DC/ Marvel comic offerings.
Godfather III - it’s gash ...
The Star Wars prequels ...
Truly, madly, deeply. Everyone involved with such a smug offering should hide there heads in shame
I've got a couple that 'filmy' folk like to rave about as being excellent.
One was called Lone Star (mid 90s) and was critically acclaimed at the time (and still is to some extent). Nothing happens in the film for so long that it just got switched off in the end.
The other one is The Revenant. After about the third ridiculously overdone "I can't believe he is not dead" bit of nastiness it just becomes utterly meh.
Oh and I have to mention 'On Chesil Beach' too. Again, nothing happens, loads of posturing, pouting and awkwardness and there is obviously an elephant in the room from the start. But it got switched off before we found out what it was because it was just too dull and preposterous in equal measure.
Movie 43
Had to walk out of that one💩
Obviously everybody will have their own opinions but for me not necessarily the worst films ever but the films that were massively hyped and therefor were a massive disappointment when I saw them were Gangs of New York , The Revenant and Dunkirk are three that really stand out for me . Probably not as bad as any of the aforementioned films but in terms of being a let down simply unbeatable .
I'm glad someone said Van Helsing, the only film I've ever walked out of a cinema on (I WOULD have walked out of the goddawful Unbearable Lightness of Being if it hadn't been for the attractive blonde I'd gone to see it with).
Films from this thread I could watch time and time again:
The Revenant
The Witch
No country for old men
Gangs of New York
Shawshank Redemption
The Revenant (dull)
The Witch (meh)
No country for old men (loved it)
Gangs of New York (amusing tosh)
Shawshank Redemption (great, apart from the extra bit tacked on the end)
But is any of them the worst film ever? Of course not...
Howard the Duck
Battlefield Earth
I am unable to articulate how truly awful I found these films.
Anything involving Jason Statham or Mark Wahlberg.
Many years ago my wife let me pick the film. I picked Daredevil and have had my film decisions questioned ever since.
I remember going to watch Highlander 2 at the Showcase Bradford.
The 9:00 showing was sold out, so we just waited around 2h5mins for the next one.
That's got to be be the most disappointing film experience of mine.
As someone said, it tried to completely ruin the first one. Thankfully I've managed to forget it and rewatch the first one with my boys and thoroughly enjoyed it anew.
As someone said, it tried to completely ruin the first one.
Didn't Highlander 2 basically contradict every main plot point from Highlander?
In particular, the whole thing about "The Quickening"?
Yeah, thread has become a pointless read of films people don’t like or are expecting to be documentaries about war, when they are merely entertainment.
The problem I have with films like 1917, Dunkirk, Darkest Hour and the Imitation Game, is that they do not put themselves forward as "merely entertainment" but present as historically accurate, when they are not. What is even more annoying, with the last 3 on the list, there is still an incredible story to tell, even if they had told the actual story.
That's how Black Adder Goes Forth ended up being used to teach WW1 history.
Why are people listing AAA movies?
Because how else would we know how edgy they are?
The problem I have with films like 1917, Dunkirk, Darkest Hour and the Imitation Game, is that they do not put themselves forward as “merely entertainment” but present as historically accurate, when they are not
That's a bit of a catch 22 though isn't it? If you're going to make a film set in a specific era then you need to take the time and effort to make it look and feel right. And it seems like the more accurate it is in look and feel the more some people take the hump when it's inaccurate in other ways.
Why are people listing a battery of AAA movies?
FIFY.
Anything involving Jason Statham
No, not at all! I grant you that they are mostly utter cheese fests but there is something gloriously entertaining about most of them. As other shave said, many on this thread don't seem to comprehend the concept of worst film ever made. It comes across as a weird case of "right on" credentials setting. I get that you may not like the film and you may have had issues with some of factual accuracy of them but to describe them as the worst film ever? Yeah, right.
Have seen plenty of (to me) awful films. One of the first I remember seeing was Beetlejuice. To me that was just plain awful. Most Steven Seagal films are pretty awful. Under Siege was actually alight but then he seed to go and put on 100 pounds and then try and carry off credible martial arts moves in largely plotless stories. Most of them utter drivel. Found Blade Runner 2049 interminably dull. I wouldn't describe it as the worst film ever made but I found it so dull I actually went to sleep in the cinema, after running out of resolve to will it to end. Spongebob Squarepants the movie was also a cinematic low point (the things we do for kids sometimes).
Most Steven Seagal films are pretty awful.
You are actually right in that statement. Other than Nico they are all shit and even worse as he has gotten older.
Under Siege was actually alight but then he seemed to go and put on 100,000 pounds and started pulling the bad guys in to his gravity well
FIFY
88 Minutes starring Al Pacino
I think Al Pacino has got to be one of the most overrated actors ever.
I got persuaded to take my young kids to the cinema to see the Moshi Monsters movie. That was awful on a level that I have not got words to describe.
Just watched independence Day resurrection. Wow. Pretty bad. Not battleship bad but pretty close.
I've only ever walked out of 2 films at the cinema.
Blade Trinity
Troy
And they were both on the same night!
Just watched independence Day resurrection. Wow. Pretty bad
A sequel to a crap film was crap? Surprises abound!
cubist
Full MemberI got persuaded to take my young kids to the cinema to see the Moshi Monsters movie. That was awful on a level that I have not got words to describe.
A lot of kids films are dross, Gnomeo and Juliet was one of the worst though.
The people who make these movies seem to think that putting a bunch of famous people as voice actors is a good substitute for enjoyment.